Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 20129
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM, J
M/S. PURAVANKARA LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO.1192 OF 2021
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI. JOSEPH ANTHONY
For the Respondents: SRI. H.K. KENCHEGOWDA, SRI B.S. KARTHIKEYAN
The court ruled that arbitrary and unconstitutional bye-laws related to building fees are invalid based on prior binding precedent, ensuring compliance with legal standards in issuing construction permits.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Quashing of Bye-Law 3.9 of the Bangalore Mahanagara Palike Building Bye-Laws, 2003 - The petitioner challenged the constitutionality and legality of several bye-laws and government circulars regarding fees and levies related to building licenses and ground rent - Previous binding decisions declared similar levies as ultra vires and invalid. (Paras 2, 3)
(B) Writ Jurisdiction - Under Article 226, the High Court can quash arbitrary, unconstitutional regulations that infringe upon equity and justice - The petitioner sought to annul subsequent irregular fee demands pertaining to construction permits. (Paras 4)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner requested a quashing of specific by-laws and notifications regarding building fees based on previous court judgments that invalidate these levies.
Findings of Court:
The petition was allowed, setting aside the demand notice and directing the issuance of necessary licenses without undue delay or conditions relating to pending appeals.
Issues: The validity of specific bye-laws and notifications linked to construction fees were questioned.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized adherence to binding precedents that invalidate arbitrary fee demands and mandated compliance with legal standards for issuing building licenses.
Result: The writ petition is allowed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition challenges building bye-laws as unconstitutional. (Para 1) |
| 2. prior cases adjudicated similar issues. (Para 2) |
| 3. court bound by previous findings. (Para 3) |
| 4. court's decision aligns with established precedent. (Para 4) |
| 5. writ petition allowed with specific orders. (Para 5) |
ORAL ORDER
The captioned petition is filed seeking for the following reliefs:
"WHEREFORE, the Petitioners most respectfully prays that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to:
a) Grant an order, direction or writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing Bye-Law 3.9 of the Bangalore Mahanagara Palike Building Bye- Laws, 2003 as unconstitutional, arbitrary, illegal and ultra-vires, in the interest of justice and equity;
b) Grant an order, direction or writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the Notification issued by the Respondent No.1 bearing No. UDD 3 TPP 2015 dated February 25, 2020 (Annexure E) insofar as the inserted Rules 37-A and 37-C are concerned;
c) Grant an order, direction or writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the circular dated August 14, 2020, bearing No. He.Ni. Ka.Pa.Ko/P.R/320/2020-21 issued by the Respondent No.4 (Annexure F) in so far the Petitioners are concerned.
d) Grant an order, direction or writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the Government Order bearing No. LD/300/LET/2006 dated January 18, 2007 (Annexure G) and the corrigendum order bearing No. LD/300/LET/2006, dated February 28, 2007 (Annexure H) issued by the Respondent No. 2 mandating upfront collection of labour welfare cess in so far the Petitioners are concerned.
e) Grant an order, direction or writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the Circular bearing No. He.Ni.Na.Yo/JD(N) /DM3/ PR/320/2015-16 dated September 04, 2015 (Annexure J) issued by the Respondent No.4 is so far as levy and collection of "Licence Fee';
f) Grant a Writ or order or direction, in the nature of Certiorari, quashing the Impugned Demand Notice bearing BBMP/Addl.Dir/JDNORTH/ 1005/20-21 dated January 08, 2021 by the Respondent No. 5 (Annexure A) as regards the demand made for :-
• Scrutiny Fee at Serial No. 1; • Ground Rent at Serial No. 2;
• License Fee at Serial No. 3;
• Betterment Fees for Building at Serial No. 4;
• Betterment Fees for Site Area at Serial No. 5;
• Security Deposit at Serial No. 6;
• Service Charge on Labour Cess at Serial No. 10;
• Levy and Collection of surcharge to be paid to BWSSB, BDA and KSCB at Serial No. 11;
• Levy and Collection of 5% surcharge to be paid to BBMP at Serial No. 12; and • Labour Cess."
g) Grant an order, direction or writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 BBMP to issue the sanction plan for construction of the Project in the Property, without insisting payment of Ground Rent, GST on Ground Rent, Betterment Charges for Building, Betterment Charges for Site, Security Deposit, License fee, Scrutiny fee, Cess for Water Supply Scheme, Surcharge for Formation Outer Ring Road, Cess for Improvement of Slum, Surcharge for Mass Rapid Transport System, Labour Cess and etc., and h) Grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the above circumstances of the case, in the interests of justice and equity."
2. The Co-ordinate Benches of this Court, in W.P.No.23086/2022 and connected matters (herein referred to as “ M/s Sapthagiri Shelters ”) as well as W.P.No.36017/2018 and connected matters (herein referred to as “ Sunderam Shetty ”), have comprehensively adjudicated the issue involved and settled the controversy. In Sunderam Shetty and connected cases, the Co-ordinate Bench declared the levies of Ground Rent, License Fee, Building License Fee, and Scrutiny Fee under the relevant bye-laws as ultra vires the Act and quashed the Government Circulars dated 04.09.2015, 27.01.2017, and 30.03.2017. Similarly, in M/s Sapthagiri Shelters and connected matters, the Co-ordinate Bench struck down the Karnataka Act No.01 of 2022 and Karnataka Act No.37 of 2024, holding that linking fees under Rule 37-A of the Karnataka Planning Au
